Hi all,
using -fexcess-precision improves the runtime from about 180259 ns to
140201 ns on my environment (Intel P3, 700Mhz, 384 MB Ram, Win2k).
That makes for me a speedup of 1.29. I tested the other flags,
-funbox-strict-fields -fliberate-case-threshold100 but did not see an
improvement.
Well,
Hi all,
Ok, it isn't FTP but HTTP, but here is the link.
http://haskell.sourcez.org/performance.zip
Regards,
Andreas Schroeder
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
I'm using Haddock 0.5, compiled for GHC 6.0.1, and I get warnings when
haddocking a simple module:
Warning: module not found: Prelude
Warning: MyModule: the following names could not be resolved:
Prelude.[] Bool Eq
I can see what's happening: I'm not passing Prelude.hs to Haddock, but
Hello,
to add a new keyword, say struct to
the GHC, I have added ITstruct to data
type Token in module Lex.lhs. Further
on I have adapted ghcExtensionKeywordsFM.
Is this already sufficient for lexing?
In LexCore there is a function lexKeyword
without a comment. It is called by lexer
if the
Dear GHC and Haskell experts,
I need advice on the following question.
My application program (called DoCon),
being ported recently to ghc-6.0.1,
needs to provide the user (program) with the following visibility
scope of items:
all the proper DoCon export
+
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
As a final note on this bug, the core dumps disappear on
mips-sgi-irix if I start from the beginning with 64bit code, i.e.
mips64-sgi-irix.
By setting -mabi=64 in CFLAGS, longs become 8 bytes, and
bugs disappear. No need for my hack of
Hi, folks!
Trying to build either 6.2 or 6.3 ghc with mingw ghc 6.0.1 and gcc 3.3.1, I
get multiple
undefined reference to `__module_registered' errors during a stage2 ghc
linking.
Is the gcc 3.3 behaviour the case?
Regards,
Kyra
___
I'm playing with rules, and I wonder if it is posible to define a rule
that will trigger for a specialization of a function.
(In the following examples, the functions are not necesarily useful or
good-style... :)
I have:
count :: (Integral b) = (a - Bool) - [a] - b
count = count' 0
